Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Refuses to Give Iran War Timeline, Don't Rush Me; Trump Says, Americans Will Spend More on Gas for a Little While; Trump Demands Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Apologize for Criticizing ICE, Border Agents. Trump Demands Apology from Schumer for Criticizing ICE; Pentagon Awards Multi-Million Defense Contract to Robotics Business Affiliated with Eric Trump; U.S. Soldier Charged with Making Money on Maduro Capture. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired April 23, 2026 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, he's called it little, easy, a short-term excursion. But now Donald Trump says he's got all the time in the world to end the war.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I don't want to rush myself.
I'm not under any pressure, whatsoever.
PHILLIP: Plus --
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): Border Patrol and ICE that nobody respects in this country.
PHILLIP: -- the president demands Chuck Schumer apologize as the administration pounces.
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, DHS SECRETARY: The definition of a lying scumbag politician, that is you.
PHILLIP: And they accused Hunter Biden of profiting off the presidency, and now Trump's son is doing a victory lap from it.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX BUSINESS HOST: Congratulations to you both. Thanks so much for being here.
PHILLIP: Live at the table, Jaime Harrison, Joe Borelli, Caroline Downey, Yemisi Egbewole, and Dan Abrams.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York. Tonight, a sudden change in tone from Donald Trump when it comes to the war. Instead of setting more deadlines or promising it'll be over soon, he's suggesting that the end is indefinite. In fact, as the cost of this war rises, the president claims that he is not under pressure to end it.
Now, remember, he set deadlines for weeks moving them at least four times, and now he's trying to convince the American people that he, quote, has all the time in the world to get a deal done.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: On the war with Iran, how long are you willing to wait until you get a unified response?
TRUMP: Well, don't rush me. Don't rush me, Jeff. You know, guys like you, you want to say, oh, so we were in Vietnam like for 18 years. We were in Iraq for many, many years. We were in for all the -- I don't like to say World War II, because that was a biggie, but we were four and a half, almost five years in World War II. We were in the Korean War for seven years. I've been doing this for six weeks.
But I don't want to rush myself, you know? Because every story say, oh, Trump is under time pressure. I'm not. No. You know who's under time pressure? They are.
I'm not under any pressure, whatsoever.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: We're just days away now from the war entering its ninth week, a timeframe that is already much longer than what he suggested the timeline would be weeks ago. And he said it was going to be months. He said for months that it was going to be quick and easy. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This is a short excursion.
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: This is not Iraq. This is not endless.
TRUMP: When it's over, and I don't think it's going to be long.
It's going to be over with pretty soon.
BARTIROMO: Well, you keep saying was. Is this war over?
TRUMP: I think it's close to over, yes. I mean, I view it as very close to over.
I think you'll see it's going to be a short-term excursion.
Short-term, short-term.
You know, you never like to say too early, you won. We won. We won the bet. In the first hour, it was over.
The hard part is done, so it should be easy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, the president, I guess he's right, it's no Vietnam War, but it is going on much longer than he said it would. And the fact that now, even his own deadline has no end, it's indefinite, what does that mean for the American people?
DAN ABRAMS, FOUNDER, MEDIAITE YOUTUBE: Look, it means that he was wrong at the outset. He won't admit it. He was wrong. He was wrong about a lot of things. But that also doesn't mean he still can't be successful in the end.
And I think that's the important nuance here, right? I think we should all want to make sure Iran can't get a nuclear weapon. Does that mean that this was the only way to go about doing it? No. But does it mean that at this point where we are today that he's probably right to say, I'm not going to rush it? Yes. Was he wrong to say before this is going to be easy, it's going to be quick? Yes, he was wrong to say that before.
But as of where we are today, that is the best path. The best path is to take our time, reject what he said before, which he won't admit, and try to move forward from here because we should all want us to be successful. We should want this to, in the end, have achieved something.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, I guess what it sounds like what you're saying is that he thought that if he just set red lines and deadlines, that Iran would respond, and now he's realized that they won't, and so he's in a negotiating posture and realizes that that could take a long time, which people could have told him before. But nevertheless, here we are.
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: Well, they are responding.
[22:05:00]
They're lashing out. They're in their death rows. They're trying desperate acts to put political pressure on Donald Trump here in the U.S.
Look, the president was always clear on one thing. He doesn't want a forever war. He set some context there. You heard from Pete Hegseth in that clip as well as the president. We're not talking about Iraq, we're not talking about Afghanistan. We're not talking about Vietnam. We're talking about a war whose military period lasted about four and a half weeks.
Now, we're in this new phase, right? And I said, we don't want a forever war. We want a forever solution. And just like the ceasefire was a tool and deadlines are a tool, the blockade is now a tool, and the blockade is what's going to bring the Iranians back to the table at some point. They have absolutely no choice.
You're absolutely right. We should all be rooting for the successful conclusion. The successful conclusion is, as it always has been, that Iran doesn't possess the capability to make a nuclear weapon, that Iran is not funding proxies in Iraq, Gaza, and elsewhere, and that they are not continuously threatening their neighbors by closing the Strait of Hormuz.
JAIME HARRISON, FORMER DNC CHAIR: I think the thing I'm rooting for is I'm hoping that no more American lives are lost because of this. That's the thing that I'm rooting for. Because we went into this and I think we didn't really have a plan. We thought that we were just going to overwhelm folks and we didn't have a plan, he didn't have an exit strategy, and now we're floundering around trying to figure out what do we do next.
And so the American people at this point are also feeling the pain of this situation because gas prices are going through the roof right now. And, again, there's no end at sight. That means that there's no relief to the American people because of this war, that has no end, that really didn't have a framework or a plan from the beginning.
PHILLIP: Let me play -- this is what Trump says about who he's negotiating with in the Iranians. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Part of the problem is that that's why I can't really an answer your question, they have all new leadership and they're fighting like cats and dogs for who's going to control. Because we've created a real mess for them, but they've created a mess for the world over the last 47 years.
They want to make a deal. We have been speaking to them. But they don't even know who's leading the country. They're in turmoil.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Well look, that might be true. That raises some questions about our planning. Did we really strategically take out the right people? I should also say, Iran is pushing back on this. So, the parliament speaker, the foreign minister, the head of the judiciary, all putting out statements today, basically speaking from one songbook saying, we're not divided. There are no radicals and moderates. We're all Iranians, we're all revolutionaries, et cetera, et cetera. So, they're denying that they're divided.
But even if they are, it does speak to our planning as a -- from a military and a strategic perspective that we didn't foresee this.
YEMISI EGBEWOLE, FORMER BIDEN WHITE HOUSE PRESS ADVISER: Right, because we went into this with the idea that we were promised total regime change. And what we've seen is just different iterations of the same regime that I believe will continue a brutal theocracy. And the difference between Iran and America that is so stark is that when there are troops on the ground and when the lives of American soldiers are at risk, the people here respond. That is when members of Congress hear the most from their constituents.
I don't believe the Iranian regime has that same pressure because they have already proven that if their people die, they will still continue. So, that, I think, is the miscalculation that this administration has. They think they're dealing with somebody that has equity with their people, but they're not.
ABRAMS: I guess I'm still trying to figure out what success is, right? I mean, the president is saying it's if we prevent them from being able to build a nuclear weapon. To actually remove all of that nuclear material, all of the enriched uranium that they have there would apparently take like thousands of troops to go in there --
PHILLIP: If you were to do it by force.
ABRAMS: Right, on the ground.
CAROLINE DOWNEY, COLUMNIST, NATIONAL REVIEW: But I wouldn't say that this administration is floundering, because what they are doing is a maximum pressure campaign. The blockade on the effective remnants of the Irani regimes blockade was a very strategic move on Trump's part, because he realizes that it would handicap Iran's economy by preventing oil from getting in and out of their ports, realizing it would hurt them as well as the other Arab neighbors who would put pressure on Iran to come to the table for a second time.
And, yes, it's been unpredictable and obviously there's a risk to switching your timeline back and forth so many times, but there's also a risk to rushing a military mission. I mean, we think of the Biden administration's botched Afghanistan withdrawal. That had a rigid timeline and it ended in chaos and disaster and American lives lost.
So, it's better actually that we are committed to not leaving Iran until all of our strategic objectives have been fulfilled. And we can't come short of that.
ABRAMS: Right. But let's come together and admit now that's not what the administration said, right? They're now changing their tune on that. Can we all agree? That's a good thing.
DOWNEY: Yes, no, I agree with you, but as so did Obama. Obama said there was a red line for Syria and the chemical weapons attacks against the Syrian people.
[22:10:00]
And then when Assad crossed that red line, we didn't militarily intervene.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, I think that's exactly the -- I mean, that's exactly the reason why Trump drawing -- he's drawn four red lines so far with Iran and has he extended them every single time.
I also -- I mean the other question I have is I think you suggested that the military pressure, the blockade, all of that, has forced Iran to do certain things. I'm not seeing it. What are they doing that is in our interests right now?
BORELLI: Look, nothing, right? I mean, that's why the blockade is still going to be in place. And I think that's why the president has been essentially open-ended on when that ends.
I don't think it's fair to say that the type of pressure that the president is facing, it's political pressure, it's pressure from Democrats, and, yes, the public saying gas prices are too high. But let's put that in context too. You know, during the Ukrainian war, Brent Crude was something like $128, $129. During October 7th, the price of oil shot up. A lot of times in our history, the price of oil shot up and it goes down. It goes down when the --
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: You know, it shouldn't be.
ABRAMS: Right.
BORELLI: That's the point, is that the president's facing pressure, economic pressure from Americans and from the Democrats because we're going into a midterm election. The Democrats are using that as leverage.
ABRAMS: They are.
BORELLI: I don't think that's a good thing. I think they should be rooting for the president and hoping to give him the most leverage in the negotiation with Iran who is a larger threat.
EGBEWOLE: If he would involve them, I think that they could figure out a way to root for him.
DOWNEY: To Abby's point, the fundamental limitation of what Trump is trying to do is what I think no one really wants to admit, which is that we're not dealing with a rational actor that cares about human life. I mean, if they're willing to execute people in the streets, protesters, they probably can endure a little bit of economic pain.
ABRAMS: That's got to be part -- right. That's right. That's got to be part of the equation, right?
DOWNEY: It has to be part of the equation. But I will say you really do have to fight with force. I mean, force is the only thing they understand.
PHILLIP: But, hold on, I don't think that that's necessarily true. I mean, Dan pointed out earlier, there are other ways to skin this cat, right? And I do think that when even though gas prices is not the most important thing, what Americans are saying is essentially if you are asking us to make a tradeoff, then the benefit needs to be worth the cost, and I think they are not seeing the benefit.
Trump said essentially that, you know, if gas prices go up, Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon, great, everybody's fine, but Iran still has all their nuclear material, okay? They're not without the nuclear dust, as he likes to call it.
HARRISON: And, Abby, I think part of what the tension the president is starting to feel is also from his base in saying that you promised us that we were not going to get involved in all these foreign entanglements. And guess what? We're now in one. There is no end in sight. Our gas prices are going up. United Airlines just announced that, what, they're going to raise their prices 15 to 20 percent over the summer, when everybody's going on their family vacations, and this is not what the American people want.
And part of it was that the president didn't sell -- make the case to the American people that we really need to do it. He didn't make the case to Democrats on the Hill or members on the Hill in general. He just went off and did it. So, you've made this mess. Now you have to clean it up.
EGBEWOLE: I'm sorry, but gas prices really is that number one issue. No one is sitting at home worried about enriched uranium. We can sit at this table and have this conversation, but everyday Americans are going to the pump and they just want to fill that tank and get their kids to school.
BORELLI: But that's the point, it's a political issue, right? It's using the temporary pain Americans are facing over gas prices, no question about that, in an effort to put pressure on the president who has to look at larger things, like a rogue state having a nuclear weapon. And I'm sorry, but I do believe that Democrats should stop using this as a leverage point and start getting behind the president.
(CROSSTALKS)
ABRAMS: What does it mean to get behind the president? Like for example, I just said, I'm rooting for us, I'm rooting for him. I want him to succeed, right. Is that enough?
BORELLI: Do you think Democrats are going to make the price of gas an issue in the midterm? The answer is obviously yes.
ABRAMS: Yes.
BORELLI: I think that it's the president's leverage in this negotiation.
ABRAMS: But, again, so your point is they should stop pressuring, the Democrats should stop pressuring Trump so that he has more leverage against Iran because everyone is behind him?
BORELLI: Because that's a better outcome than Americans paying slightly more for gas, which, yes, I mean, did not go as high as it did during the Biden --
ABRAMS: The reality is there's a cost benefit to this. To pretend that there's not, to say, oh, Democrats should --
BORELLI: No one's pretending that. DOWNEY: Well, but I think you're slightly undermining the benefit of a massive menace on the international stage being neutered for all the future.
ABRAMS: But what does that mean? But what does that mean? I mean, like for example, the first attack on the nuclear facilities, right, in Iran, we were told was quite successful and that was much more limited, right? It was just a bombing on the nuclear facilities. We were told it obliterated them, right? The problem that you guys are talking about in theory was solved, but it wasn't, right?
DOWNEY: Well, it turns out that there's a lot of tentacles to this -- all of this threat.
[22:15:02]
(CROSSTALKS)
HARRISON: The question is what really was the goal? Was it the goal that he said it was, or was there some other goals that he's trying to get at all?
PHILLIP: All right. Well, look, I mean, I think Democrats are entitled to think that there's a different strategy that should be at play here, right? That's part of what they're allowed to do in this country, even if they want the United States to succeed.
All right, next for us, the president is demanding Chuck Schumer apologize immediately after comments that he made about ICE and Border Agents.
Plus, breaking news tonight, an American soldier has been arrested after betting on the capture of Nicolas Maduro, an operation in which he was involved. Trump responds by saying, well, the world's become a casino.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, as the DHS shutdown drags on, President Trump is lashing out at Chuck Schumer for comments that the senator made about immigration enforcement agencies. Today, Senate Republicans approved a budget blueprint to fund ICE and Border Patrol in the first of many steps to come toward reopening the government completely.
All Democrats voted no with Schumer calling out his GOP colleagues on their priorities.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUMER: Republicans think the best thing to do right now is cut another $140 billion check for unaccountable rogue agents.
Where the heck are you? America is crying out for relief from high costs, and you are here adding $140 billion to an agency that nobody -- the two groups, Border Patrol and ICE, that nobody respects in this country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Trump called Schumer's comments egregious, incorrect, unpatriotic, and dangerous, and demanded an apology. We also heard from DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin who had this response. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MULLIN: It takes a lot to get me upset, but Chuck Schumer, no one respects you. The definition of a lying, scumbag politician, that is you. You would be the definition if you Googled you right now.
You're for open borders and you're for the criminals running amok in our cities. And for you to say that is so disrespectful to the law enforcement that that is out there protecting you because he has a detail with him. How about he walks around these city streets without a detail? I wonder how safe he would feel.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: You know, I think that it's probably reasonable to criticize Schumer for a blanket statement like that, but you also have to acknowledge that President Trump has a long history of attacking law enforcement when it's not convenient for him. He's called the FBI corrupt. The -- he's called it the Injustice Department. He said that the DOJ and FBI are Trump-hating thugs. He's called -- you know, he's called the Justice Department corrupt and said that they -- that it takes courage to fight them. It's kind of -- he doesn't really have much of a leg to stand on here.
BORELLI: Look, you know, first of all, Chuck Schumer I don't even think his own party wants him to still be the leader of the Democrats in the Senate. I think he's doing a horrible job, and I think you're going to see the House potentially pick up seats, but the Senate not in part of what he has been doing over the last four years, over the last several years.
And I want to point that out for a number of reasons. He was the architect of some of the immigration laws that are in place today that ICE is now operating under. I mean, he was part of the Gang of Eight. He's been there. He was for biometric verification for jobs. He used the term illegal aliens all the time. I mean, this is someone who's done a complete 180 on --
PHILLIP: But that's none of those things are the things that he's talking about in terms of what has caused ICE to --
BORELLI: He's out there criticizing ICE agents for doing the job. If he was so unhappy with the job that ICE agents are doing, he was in a position at several times over his career to change the immigration laws.
PHILLIP: Well, you're talking about the Gang of Eight. I mean, the Gang of Eight was an actual bipartisan attempt was to reform immigration in this country. Yes, I mean, there have been several attempts. And --
BORELLI: In 2009, Chuck Schumer would've been a Republican in 2026.
PHILLIP: There is not -- I should note, there has not been a single attempt in the last year in which President Trump has been in power and Republicans have been in power to do anything to reform the immigration system in this country. They've done nothing.
DOWNEY: So, I understand that the Democratic criticism of ICE right now is that it needs reform. That's what Chuck Schumer's trying to say, but he didn't attack those two ICE officers that he claimed went rogue and that committed crimes. That's what he's contending. He's saying that the entire institution of ICE, which is a basic government function, to apprehend, detain, and deport illegal aliens. He's saying that has no purpose. He's saying we don't respect that.
And I think that sends a dangerous signal to not just illegal aliens that are trying to come across the border, but also cartels, coyotes. It shows that we're weak by saying that.
EGBEWOLE: I mean, I think he's showing that we don't respect this version of ICE, because, of course, ICE has existed and existed quite well under Barack Obama, but this version of ICE that has gone out of its way to shroud some of its activities. I mean, Chuck Schumer's speaking to a base, a base of people that who are upset with ICE.
ABRAMS: But that's the sort of translation people do of Trump, right? Trump says something dumb or whatever and you hear Republicans say, well, what he really meant was -- you know, what Schumer said was stupid.
[22:25:00]
He shouldn't have said it. It's bad politics. It's bad for the country. It's bad for law enforcement.
But to your point, it is also hypocritical of the president to act as if he is Mr. Pro-Law Enforcement when, in addition to the things you were talking about, he pardoned the people who attacked the Capitol police on January 6th.
So, this notion of sort of like, oh, I'm so harmed, you know, the people who are going to be pro-law enforcement across the board can criticize Schumer and say, you should not be saying that, and can also criticize Trump when he does things which feel anti-law enforcement. But it would be nice if there was some level of equity in this and intellectual consistency in the criticism or the welcoming of law enforcement as opposed to it just when it's convenient.
HARRISON: But I think you can be pro-law enforcement and still critique law enforcement.
ABRAMS: You can critique, but that wasn't a critique of law enforcement. That was just --
EGBEWOLE: I don't think anybody at the table has excused Chuck Schumer's comment specifically.
HARRISON: But I think if you go to Minnesota and you asked Rene Goode's family and Alex Pretti's family and the people of Minnesota about their perception of ice right now, it probably is more in line with what Chuck Schumer said, right?
ABRAMS: And that's a minority -- but that's a tiny minority of the country.
HARRISON: The sentiment, I would not say it's a tiny minority, because the sentiment that the murders of those two folks, it gave a chill down the spine on a lot of Americans.
ABRAMS: But here's what happened. This is what happened with the defund the police, right, after George -- no, it was. George Floyd happened, and rather than criticized the specific actions of an officer, everyone went crazy and they started criticizing police officers and defund the police. And that's kind of what it feels like Schumer's doing here.
EGBEWOLE: But he didn't say, abolish ICE.
ABRAMS: He didn't. But he's in that --
DOWNEY: Well, he came kind of close to saying --
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: The funding of the agency is in a way defunding the agency. I mean, he's using that as a leverage point. But if he got his way, theoretically, he's --
DOWNEY: He's saying it's illegitimate.
HARRISON: Because he wants to change the practices of the agency, in which a lot of people believe they should.
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: He was for all those laws in 2009, 2008, 2007 --
PHILLIP: So, are we in agreement that saying that ICE and Border Patrol is illegitimate and saying that the FBI and the DOJ are illegitimate are both bad, correct?
DOWNEY: Yes, in a vacuum. But here's what I would add to that. It was many --
PHILLIP: Yes, but?
DOWNEY: Yes, but Republican's contention is that the FBI, which is a law enforcement agency that's supposed to keep people safe in the homeland was hijacked for lawfare.
PHILLIP: So, you're saying that there was a reason for Trump to say it, and so it was justified? Isn't that literally what Jaime is trying to say about what Schumer is saying?
DOWNEY: What I'm trying to say is that IICE, again, a basic function of government, is --
PHILLIP: So, yes. So is the FBI and so is the Department of Justice.
DOWNEY: Yes. But it was usually --
PHILLIP: And, actually -- and I would actually counter what you're saying, because just remember, DHS only has only existed since the post-9/11 world. So, the functions of those agencies have existed before, but the actual agencies themselves are relatively new in the big scheme of things. You can't say the same of the FBI.
DOWNEY: But how do Democrats propose that immigration enforcement gets done?
PHILLIP: Well, the way that it was done before, which was that it was enforced by the federal government, but there wasn't a thing called ICE.
BORELLI: It wasn't a thing called sanctuary cities either.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: You're adding, it's bad but, to what Trump says about one part of the federal government. Jaime is adding a --
DOWNEY: The FBI's scale and scope changed dramatically. The FBI is not just about keeping --
PHILLIP: So, you're saying that he was justified in calling the FBI and the DOJ corrupt?
DOWNEY: I'm saying that its scale and scope are now for political lawfare. The FBI is not just for keeping citizens safe anymore, okay?
HARRISON: It's about sending your director to the Olympics so he can --
PHILLIP: So, you're saying that all the many things the FBI does, you know, fighting against, you know, criminal gangs, fighting against trafficking, fighting against gun crimes, what are all the things, you're saying that the whole kit and caboodle of the FBI gets boiled down to the actions that they took specifically against one man, Donald Trump?
DOWNEY: I'm saying that it is no longer even remotely the same agency from when it was founded after J. Edgar Hoover. It's not.
PHILLIP: Okay. When J. Edgar Hoover was wiretapping American citizens, and infiltrating civil rights organizations. So, I guess that point was that -- listen, all I'm saying is that I --
DOWNEY: So, do you think that ICE is irredeemably corrupt right now? PHILLIP: That's not what I'm saying. I'm just asking you, Caroline, if you think that it's so bad that Chuck Schumer said what he said? Maybe he went way over his skis. And we don't have -- I wish I had polling about how Americans felt about these specific agencies.
EGBEWOLE: We should check with this guy.
DOWNEY: Yes.
[22:30:00]
PHILLIP: But maybe he's way over his skis, but I don't understand why you can't just apply that same logic to the President, who basically called two law enforcement agencies corrupt only because of the actions that they took against him.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And the actions that they took against him, which by the way, were lawful. They were lawful. He didn't like them, but they were lawful.
CAROLINE DOWNEY, "NATIONAL REVIEW" COLUMNIST: I think what the FBI did under Biden was definitely unprecedented.
PHILLIP: It was lawful.
DOWNEY: But it was unprecedented.
DAN ABRAMS, FOUNDER, MEDIAITE YOUTUBE: We all know it was unprecedented. And what Trump did was unprecedented. So it just becomes a question of chicken and egg on that. I mean, yes, it's true, it was unprecedented. But you know, again, we don't have time to get into the comparison of the FBI now versus the FBI under Biden in terms of politicization.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I mean, yes, I mean, and frankly, most of this is politicization. But you know, there's a little bit of a double standard here. Next for us, Eric Trump is now celebrating a $24 million defense contract for his robotics company. And critics are calling it corruption in plain sight. We'll discuss that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, a lucrative Pentagon deal for a company backed by Donald Trump's son. Critics are calling it corruption and profiting off the presidency. Eric Trump did a victory lap this morning on Fox News after securing that $24 million defense contract from his father's administration. And for Fox News host, Maria Bartiromo, that was cause for celebration.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Joining us now is Foundation Future Industries founder and CEO, Sankat Patak, and the company's chief strategy advisor, Eric Trump, President Trump's son. Congratulations to you both. Thank you so much for being here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: You'll recall Bartiromo was among those accusing the Biden family of enriching themselves from their proximity to the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Hunter Biden was selling influence and selling visits to his father, selling this okay on deals.
REP. JAMES COMER (R) OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE CHAIR: Hunter Biden and his associates courted business in countries that correlated directly with Joe Biden's work as vice president.
REP. NANCY MACE (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: These people didn't come to Hunter Biden because he understood world politics or that he was experienced in it, or that he understood Chinese businesses. They wanted him for the access his last name gave them.
SEN. RON JOHNSON (R) WISCONSIN: Hunter Biden used his father's position and name to enrich himself and his family.
PAM BONDI, THEN- TRUMP DEFENSE ATTORNEY: The few months after Hunter Biden joined that corrupt company's board, the Obama-Biden State Department began doing business with them.
COMER: The President's participation in enriching his family is in a word abuse of the highest order.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, let's say all of that is true. Is it okay for the Trump sons to get on the boards of all these companies, a robotics company, a drone company, for the express purpose of those companies getting contracts with his father's administration.
DOWNEY: Yes, and well, there's a lot of robotics companies, right? And given the President's relationship to a key investor in Phantom, the one that Eric Trump is involved in, I think they should have made a case to the public, why did this company win the Pentagon contract? Why did they get the bid? What made them the most compelling candidate for the job above all other companies?
With that being said, I think the Hunter Biden comparison is interesting. And obviously, that was a case of clear conflict of interest and outright influence peddling, a massive scandal, right? The difference though is that you know, accepting secret payments from a foreign oligarch is not national defense procurement, which is what this company is doing with Eric Trump
(CROSSTALK) PHILLIP: Well, you're mixing apples and oranges. We don't know how much Eric Trump is being paid to have a nominal title on this company. So the secret payments that would be analogous would be what Eric Trump is being paid. We do know, however, that they are getting a government contract because of that relationship. And it's so out in the open.
(CROSSTALK)
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: No, we don't. We don't know that. You're insinuating that.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold on. He went on television morning to brag about how once he has become a part of this company, they have now gotten a federal government contract. Joe, we are not stupid.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: I watched the segment.
PHILLIP: People are not dumb. You're trying to say that --
BORELLI: You're saying the company got the contract only because --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- there's no relationship between --
BORELLI: You're trying to say --
PHILLIP: Erick Trump being a part of this company and them getting a government contract?
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: You made an allegation and now you're insinuating something that you have no proof for. You have no proof.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: This was a $24 million which is a drop in the book of Pentagon spending.
PHILLIP: Hold on, Joe. Joe --
BORELLI: It's for a company to test the product to be able to potentially future supply American and Ukrainian troops.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Even if -- even if there was no proof that there was a clear role that Eric Trump played, why is it appropriate that the President's son, a company that is backed by the President's son should get a government contract, period? BORELLI: Period. Because --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: That's something that you guys thought was corruption when you accused Hunter Biden of doing it.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: No, no. When you're trying to hide it and you have 10 percent for the big guy --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Oh, so, when you got to hide it --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- you have to hide it in order for to be bad.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: So, let's put it this way.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: One of the biggest knits ever, by the way --
BORELLI: Hold on.
ABRAMS: That wasn't even vice president anymore. He wasn't even vice president anymore. And the guy's been totally discredited, and there's zero evidence that Joe Biden never made a penny. So, if we're going to actually go down this road, it's really a bad comparison to Trump.
BORELLI: Eric Trump went on a show this morning on cable news and touted a press conference on a company -- hold on -- a company that he is an investor on that's doing something with the Pentagon.
[22:40:02]
If Hunter Biden was so clean, why didn't he ever go on the Maria Bartiromo show and talk about the great work he was doing for Barack?
(CROSSTALK)
DOWNEY: I also think it matters what the companies are doing. I think it kind of matters what the companies are.
(CROSSTALK)
DOWNEY: Burisma versus Hunter Biden having to deal with a Chinese firm that's connected to the Chinese Communist Party --
(CROSSTALK) ABRAMS: The best argument was always this idea that, oh, the Trumps actually have businesses, right? And Hunter Biden was just selling his personality and his influence.
UNKNOWN: Yes.
ABRAMS: They didn't have a crypto business.
UNKNOWN: No.
ABRAMS: They didn't have a drone business, you know. They didn't have robotics systems.
(CROSSTALK)
DOWNEY: Have they done deals - have they --
(CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: But they didn't have this before. All of this started --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP. All of the deals that have come into play once Trump (inaudible) running as president --
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: What deal did Joe Biden do --
(CROSSTALK)
DOWNEY: Hunter Biden did a deal with a Chinese firm connected to the Chinese Communist Party. Meanwhile, this technology from Eric Trump's firm that he's connected to is making robots for the battlefield that are supposed to make us competitive with China.
(CROSSTALK)
JAIME HARRISON, FORMER DNC CHAIR: The Trump family has made $1.4 billion --1.4 billion dollars since he was president.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: A lot less. A lot less.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: His net worth has gone up by three or four times.
HARRISON: While the American people are suffering.
PHILLIP: Just to give you an example, I mean, the Trump family, they've gone heavy into crypto, which by the way, the President has a huge --
(CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: And he's changed his policy on crypto
ABRAMS: -- as a result of this.
(CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: That's the biggest point.
PHILLIP: The sale of World Liberty Financial crypto tokens have netted them $550 million over the last year. The stake in World Liberty Financial to a foreign investment firm is $200 million. There's tons of money being thrown around here, okay? Hunter Biden's paintings, which apparently were such a huge issue for Republicans, he netted a grand total of $1.5 million. We are talking of orders of magnitude of difference.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: The Burisma thing, look, we can do both, right? We can say, as I did, I was one of the early people criticizing Hunter Biden on this, on the Burisma relationship, on the conflicts of interest, et cetera. We can also make judgments that says, okay, now that I've seen everything that the Trump family is doing, I think what the Trump family has done is worse
Okay, people can disagree with me about that, but you can actually go through the money. You can talk about the amount at stake. You can talk about the changes in policy that occur. Joe Biden was vice president. He wasn't the president. There is no evidence that any policy changed as a result of Hunter Biden. There is evidence that because of the Trump family's involvement, the policies have changed. That's a big difference.
HARRISON: And I would also add, Trump has increased the budget for the Pentagon by 400 -- 44 percent -- , $400 billion.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I should say, he is requesting an increase in the budget which hasn't happened yet. Next for us, a U.S. soldier involved in the capture of Nicolas Maduro was arrested for allegedly betting on the operation and cashing in. Hear the President's response to that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:47:53]
PHILLIP: Tonight, allegations of insider trading in the military, a U.S. Special Forces soldier who took part in the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, was arrested and charged with allegedly betting on that covert operation. Master Sergeant Gannon Ken Van Dyke is accused of wagering $32,000 that Maduro would be out of power by January.
Prosecutors say that that long shot bet, which was made just days before the actual raid, netted him $400,000. Van Dyke is now facing five criminal charges. And President Trump was asked about this today. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Are you concerned that federal employees are betting on these prediction markets and potentially getting rich?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, I don't know about it, but was he betting that they would get him or they wouldn't get him?
UNKNOWN: It sounds like he was betting on his removal from office, that Maduro would be removed. It sounds like he was involved in the operation.
TRUMP: That's like Pete Rose betting on his own team.
(LAUGHTER)
TRUMP: It's a little like Pete Rose. Pete Rose, kept him out of the Hall of Fame because he bet on his own team. Now, if he bet against his team, that would be no good, but he bet on his own team. I'll look into it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: He was then asked about the allegations that people inside the administration are using these prediction markets to make money on the war with Iran
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The whole world, unfortunately, has become somewhat of a casino. And you look at what's going on all over the world, in Europe, and every place they're doing these betting things. I was never much in favor of it. I don't like it, conceptually, but it is what it is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: All right, well, I think a couple of notes here, it's kind of dovetails with our past conversation. The President's sons are also very involved in these betting markets. The Trump family organization is working on opening their own betting market. Don Jr. is an investor in Polymarket, and his venture capital firm is a paid strategic advisor to Kalshi. So, there's that. But, you know, I think what's interesting tonight is that you're hearing some lawmakers saying this guy should be pardoned.
[22:50:04]
Anna Paulina Luna says, "Unless DOJ plans going after all the crooks in Congress currently insider trading, this is simply skewed justice. There's no justice when a guy like this gets the book thrown at him, yet members are legally profiting every day." Is she right? HARRISON: No. I mean, he shouldn't be pardoned. I think what they
need to do is make sure that the enforcement -- that they enforce and they let all government officials, whether you're in the military, you work in executive branch or the legislative branch, you can't do that. You can't take inside information that you have, and use that to go into the betting markets or to make stock trades or any of that.
PHILLIP: But it is happening.
HARRISON: It is happening. So, therefore --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I think her point is that it is happening. Members of Congress are getting orders of magnitude wealthier in their jobs. And there's no explanation except perhaps that they have access to information that the rest of the country does not-- that affects markets.
YEMISI EGBEWOLE, FORMER BIDEN WHITE HOUSE PRESS ADVISOR: Well, I think that this is really the start of the precedent for something like this. I don't think prediction markets are going away and I want to give Polymarket, they're due on this because they flagged it. And they immediately reported it because they know that Congress is watching them. And they know that regulatory action is coming. So, I think that they were really smart here.
But just because you can't wrap up all of Congress right now doesn't mean that this man who did something that really endangered our national security as a nation shouldn't be punished.
DOWNEY: That's the most important point, is the national security part, because this is a major operation security violation. I mean, he threatened the entire mission. He endangered his fellow soldiers by basically giving Iran potentially, or sorry, giving the regime, Venezuela, advance notice by flagging this. And you know, profiting off of confidential information that wasn't his to dish out.
But I do think that the optics could be potentially problematic if he's prosecuted. And Nancy Pelosi's husband and all these other congressmen and all these other lawmakers are getting rich off stock trades because they somehow got advance notice of something small.
ABRAMS: But we don't have proof, you know, with regard to them committing any sort of criminal acts. But I will say that I think there's a level of sympathy for him because of his actions, right? Because he's a member of the military. Because I think he's probably viewed by many as having been in a risky mission. If that's the reason, then I think you also have to ask the question, are we going to apply the same standard, for example, to the spouses of members of military who are being deported right now, right?
If we're going to say we're going to give special deference to members of the military, we're going to say, you know what, we think we should cut them a break because of everything they're doing for the country, et cetera. I hope we apply that more broadly. If it happens here, and that's the reason, I hope that it applies beyond just this.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I, yes, and I think you're kind of illustrating one of the problems with saying, okay, if you're in the military, you don't get the rules applied to you. That's kind of the opposite of how the military works. They have even more stringent rules about conduct. I mean, they can get reprimanded and punished for just moral conduct, let alone for illegal conduct. And this is more serious than a lot of things because of the national security risks. But I don't want us to, I mean, he's not the only one, okay?
BORELLI: That's my point.
PHILLIP: Well, let me just read this. Chris Murphy says on the Iran war, "The Iran war has become a corruption racket, he claims, for people close to Trump. This war is killing Americans, causing global food crisis, making Iran stronger, making America weaker, and enabling some of the most massive corruption in history."
And he's saying that because of reporting that there were a series of bets worth $430 million on a drop in crude prices just 15 minutes before the President made the announcement of an extended ceasefire. That has happened multiple times in this conflict. That's a real thing.
BORELLI: Chris Murphy's politicizing it, but like, there are betting markets and on these prediction markets on hundreds of things every single day. And I think there is a great deal of skewing going on by people on the inside. I think a big chunk of the people who are betting on these things, either no first-hand information believed they have an inside information of something, and that's what they're doing.
I think this industry is right for regulation. I just -- I feel, you know, I'm torn about making this guy who risked his life in the Maduro raid, right? He risked his life savings too, it probably seems like it.
EGBEWOLE: Okay, nobody forced him into the military. He signed up for that.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: I'm not saying that. I'm just saying, making him the poster child for the regulation might not be the best --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Well, a good way to make him not the poster child is to charge other people who are doing the same thing.
BORELLI: Correct.
PHILLIP: So, that would solve that problem. All right, next for us. A new voice is going to join us at the table. You, the panelists, are going to read your viewer feedback. But first, a quick programming note. This weekend, join Eva Longoria as she discovers Burgundy and Alsace on the CNN original series, "Eva Longoria Searching for France." Two new episodes drop on Sunday night at 9 P.M. on CNN, and the next day on the CNN app.
[22:55:03]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: In place of nightcaps tonight, we want to read some of your viewer feedback during the show. So Joe, you're up first.
BORELLI: Oh boy, is it on screen? Are we putting it up? Okay. I heard you on CNN this evening. You really are a jackass, aren't you?
[23:00:00]
It's amazing how you twist yourself into a pretzel defending Eric Trump. F you.
(LAUGHTER)
PHILLIP: All right. Go ahead, Jamie.
HARRISON: From Noah. Harrison is absolutely irrelevant and a perennial failure in everything he does with politics and punditry. Is he considered a tree? Noah, bless your heart.
PHILLIP: Oh my God, bless your heart. All right, I've got one. Please try not to use the phrase "skin the cat" on your show. It was signed #cat, and cat mom and cat lover. Sorry, I thought it was just an idiom. I didn't realize it would offend the cat people. All right, let me see. Oh, wait, I think we have to go. Sorry. We got to go. All right, everybody. Thank you very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
